Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Santa Rosa Housing Authority adopts FY 2025–26 budget, names NOFA ad hoc committee and authorizes litigation
Summary
At its June 23 meeting the City of Santa Rosa Housing Authority adopted a proposed FY 2025–26 budget, appointed an ad hoc committee to review Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) applications, approved remote participation for Vice Chair Downey and, in closed session, authorized counsel to initiate litigation by a 5–1 vote.
The City of Santa Rosa Housing Authority on June 23 adopted its proposed fiscal year 2025–26 budget, approved procedures for the upcoming Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) and appointed an ad hoc panel to review NOFA applications. The authority also voted to allow Vice Chair Downey to participate remotely and, in closed session, authorized legal counsel to initiate litigation by a 5–1 vote (Commissioner Owen dissenting; Chair Newton absent).
Rebecca Lane, a program specialist with the Department of Housing and Community Services, led a study session on priorities for the fiscal year 2025–26 NOFA. Lane recommended maintaining a scoring preference for rehabilitation of existing affordable housing and adding negative points where developers fail to execute loan agreements by funder deadlines, citing rising time pressures from funding sources. "Funds are not as readily available for rehabilitation projects as for new construction," Lane said, urging a continued priority for rehab projects.
TheNOFA packet staff indicated approximately $3,566,548 would be available for the NOFA, composed of federal, state and local sources; Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding was reported as a little over $1 million, PLHA (Permanent Local Housing Allocation) as the state source, and the bulk of the remainder from local sources. If commissioners approve staff direction, staff planned to publish the NOFA within days with a July 25 application deadline, ad hoc review committee work in mid-August and funding recommendations to the full board on Sept. 22.
During the discussion, Lane clarified staff intent for the proposed negative-point penalty: it targets failure to execute loan documents that allow a developer to access awarded funds, not partial spend-downs. Lane also corrected an earlier figure raised by a commissioner about federal reductions, saying, "In the upcoming fiscal year, there is a reduction in our federal funding. It is 2%, not 20%." The authority recorded no public comments on the NOFA item.
Commissioners volunteered and then voted to appoint Vice Chair Downey and Commissioner Capio to the NOFA ad hoc review committee; the motion passed by roll call, 6 ayes, 1 absent. The board directed staff to proceed with the NOFA timeline described by Lane and to return ad hoc recommendations to the full board in September.
Kate Goldfein, administrative services officer for the Housing and Community Services Department, presented the proposed FY 2025–26 budget and asked the authority to adopt it by resolution. Goldfein said the budget reflects approximately $57.3 million in funding and roughly $56.7 million in expenditures across the department’s three program areas: administration, the housing trust and rental assistance. She told the authority that most of the budget (about 95%) is federal grant-driven, with roughly 1% state and 4% local funding; local funds include real property transfer taxes and in-lieu fees.
Goldfein and staff described the principal drivers of budget change since the study session: final federal allocations (CDBG and HOME down 2% year over year; HOPWA up 1%); an increased administrative allowance from HUD that added roughly $181,000 to federal-program administrative revenue; and higher per-unit housing assistance payment (HAP) costs. Staff said they budget assuming full utilization of vouchers (about 1,925 vouchers and roughly 250–300 port-in vouchers per month) and noted HAP per-unit costs had risen about 13–14% year over year. Goldfein characterized the submitted budget as a "best-case" or optimistic budget that would allow the authority to lease up to 100% of vouchers if HUD funding and adjustments permit.
After discussion and with no public comment on the budget item, a motion to waive reading of the text and approve the FY 2025–26 budget resolution passed by roll call, 6 ayes and 1 absent. The roll call votes were recorded in the meeting minutes.
Early in the meeting the authority also voted to allow Vice Chair Downey to participate remotely because of a temporary mobility issue; commissioners recorded their approvals by roll call and the board noted that Downey would participate with both audio and video enabled and be accompanied in the meeting room by one adult medical provider.
After the open session items the authority convened a closed session. Upon reconvening, staff reported that the board, by a 5–1 vote with Commissioner Owen dissenting and Chair Newton absent, authorized legal counsel to initiate litigation on behalf of the housing authority in one case; specifics will be made public only if and when the case is formally filed.
The meeting adjourned following the closed-session report.
Ending note: staff will publish the NOFA according to the timeline described, the ad hoc committee will review applications in mid-August and funding recommendations will return to the full authority on Sept. 22.
